
A lot of people hate this game. I love it enough to post a picture of me playing it.
A lot of people hate this game. I love it enough to post a picture of me playing it.
Hydrothermal vents near the Galápagos, via Getty Images & NYT
The artist’s concept depicts Kepler-186f , the first validated Earth-size planet to orbit a distant star in the habitable zone. Via NASA Ames/SETI Institute/JPL-Caltech
This post was written by Honor’s Bio student, Isabel López Molini.
Exoplanets are found outside our Solar System. They revolve around a different star. The NASA Kepler Space Telescope discovered the first near earth sized planet, marking the journey to finding another “Earth”. This planet was called Kepler-186f, dedicated to the astronomer Johannes Kepler for his laws on the idea that the planets orbited the sun and the orbits were not perfect circles, but ovals. Although it is not yet determined whether or not the planet is habitable, it is within a habitable zone. The problem is not the exoplanet itself, but the star it revolves around. Scientists believe the star might not provide enough sunlight or heat towards the planet, meaning that life may not be possible. Nevertheless there have been other discoveries of exoplanets.
Kepler-186f is known not as Earth’s twin but as Earth’s cousin; it is about 10X bigger than our Earth. The discoveries of these new exoplanets suggest that life may be possible somewhere else, which is a huge step for human kind. This video provides information and facts about kepler-186f:
A quote from Johannes Kepler:
“The diversity of the phenomena nature is so great, and the treasures hidden in the heavens so rich, precisely in order that the human mind shall never be lacking in fresh nourishment.”
Kepler was amused by the discoveries that Earth provided, but outer space was his biggest source of amazement. Kepler was an extraordinary scientist because had an open mind; wonder was an important part of his scientific mind. This is what scientists need in order to stand out. He not only thought of the impossible but, most importantly, he stayed true to his scientific beliefs and that’s how scientists encounter new discoveries.
They fight for what they believe in.
Universum: Giordano Bruno taking a peek of the universe. Via
The following text is a comment that Arnaldo Franco, an AP Bio student, wrote about the post titled Science Club Post: Geocentrism vs Heliocentrism:
This is one of the few posts–if not the first–that contains no writing at all, and yet with only a GIF we are able to find a relation between two scientific discoveries and their processes: the correction of the solar system model and the discovery of DNA as the genetic material. For starters, Ptolemy’s model stated that the center of the universe was the Earth itself; we now know that this was an erroneous thought, just like thinking that proteins were the most important molecules of genetic inheritance due to the uncertainty of DNA. Actually, both reasons for these thoughts are similar: there was not enough evidence and no way to think that the Earth was not the center of the universe and that proteins were not the genetic material. It made sense to many because the sun and planets seemed to revolve around the Earth while proteins were present in almost every biological aspect.
However, there are always great minds that think alike. Both Copernicus and the Hershey-Chase duo knew that there was something wrong: there was a center to both ideas, but the centers that were accepted at the time just did not click. And so, as any scientist would do, these people tested their hypotheses with experiments–Copernicus with astronomical observation and the Hershey-Chase duo with laboratory procedures.
In the end, all of their experiments came to prove them right. For Copernicus’ case, the model of the solar system evolved from this—
to this—
.
As for the Hershey-Chase duo, their famous bacteria-phage experiment
came to show that the central figure of genetic material was indeed DNA. This way, many conflicts involving these two situations were solved, and the road to new scientific discoveries was paved.
P.S.: Do these look similar? If so, how?
If you answer the aforementioned question on the comment section below, your comment will be counted as double.
Coloured transmission electron micrograph of a deadly cluster of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteria, which are resistant to antibiotics. Via
Aulonia hexagona–studied by Ernst Haeckel, with microscopes from the 18th century.
Using handcrafted microscopes, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek was the first to observe and describe microorganisms, which he called animacules. He was the first microbiologist. His skills as a lens manufacturer allowed him to observe a world that no one imagined possible. This happened during the 1670’s. His findings were not met with enthusiasm by his peers:
“Despite the initial success of Van Leeuwenhoek’s relationship with the Royal Society, this relationship was soon severely strained. In 1676, his credibility was questioned when he sent the Royal Society a copy of his first observations of microscopic single-celled organisms. Previously, the existence of single-celled organisms was entirely unknown. Thus, even with his established reputation with the Royal Society as a reliable observer, his observations of microscopic life were initially met with both skepticism and open ridicule.[12] Eventually, in the face of Van Leeuwenhoek’s insistence, the Royal Society arranged for Alexander Petrie, minister to the English Reformed Church in Delft, Benedict Haan, at that time Lutheran minister at Delft, and Henrik Cordes, then Lutheran minister at the Hague, accompanied by Sir Robert Gordon and four others to determine whether it was in fact Van Leeuwenhoek’s ability to observe and reason clearly, or perhaps the Royal Society’s theories of life itself that might require reform. Finally in 1677 [13] Van Leeuwenhoek’s observations were fully vindicated by the Royal Society.” — Via
Almost 350 years later we have been able to observe chemical reactions. We can see atoms with very powerful microscopes. But, does this mean that everyone has seen a cell? Like Leeuwenhoek before us; Science Club and Biology students were able to observe specimens using self-made microscopes at more or less the same magnification: between 50 and 200 times the original size. For this we used: 1) bobby pins, 2) lenses (taken from key chain laser pointers), 3) and a mobile device camera:
Lenses (7 of them, inside the contact lens case), feather & bobby pins.
Rabbit Testis
Pine stem, cross section
Housebee mouth parts
Hydrilla verticillata
Tilia, stem (North american tree)
Eyelashes
Lego stud
Pig Motor Nerve
Honeybee worker leg composite I
Honeybee worker leg (detail)
Cross section of a single dog food grain (low fat)
[H/T] for the photos to: Adriana, Gerardo & Gustavo (Science Club); Ana & Lorenzo (10-5); Sofía, Diego, Bianca, Christian & Andrea (10-4).
“Rho Cassiopeiae Sol VY Canis Majoris” by Anynobody – Own work by uploader.. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Commons.
“CRISPR overview” by Nielsrca – Own work
You must be logged in to post a comment.